Yenuga v Attorney General (NSW)

The applicant, Yenuga, sought judicial review of a decision made by a primary judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary judge had dismissed the applicant's request for an inquiry into his convictions under section 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW). The proceedings were heard by Ward P, Adamson JA, and Griffiths AJA.

The core of the applicant's claim was that the primary judge's dismissal of his application constituted jurisdictional error. This was based on several grounds, including allegations that the dismissal was unreasonable, that the primary judge exhibited bias, and that irrelevant considerations were taken into account. Furthermore, the applicant contended that the primary judge breached procedural fairness by basing the dismissal on no evidence and failing to consider the evidence presented, thereby exceeding the scope of the statutory function. Additionally, the applicant challenged the constitutionality of sections 7(1)(c) and 13 of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), arguing they offended the institutional integrity of the NSW courts under the Kable doctrine and unconstitutionally required the Court to create new offences.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's amended summons seeking judicial review. The Court found no jurisdictional error on the part of the primary judge. The claims of unreasonableness, bias, and the consideration of irrelevant factors were not substantiated. The Court also concluded that procedural fairness had not been breached, and that the primary judge had acted within the scope of their statutory function. The constitutional challenges to the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW) were also rejected. Consequently, the amended summons was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings.